Why decide that taxes are paid poorly when the regulation of them had been shoddy as well?
Well, yes. I'd prefer a total overhaul of the US tax system. And I advocate for lots of reform all across the government and economic system.
One reason I think we have to look at things differently now is that there are massive environmental impacts that we can't run away from. In the past, if people screwed up one area, they could move to another. Now that we are so interconnected, we've got to find solutions that require some level of cooperation or we need to find solutions that work even when people's poor decisions don't contribute to the common good.
Companies are moving elsewhere to avoid paying US taxes. Maybe privacy issues are a cover for that.
I think private companies totally pull the strings on what the government does with data. There are contracts to sell to government.
So if we don't want government poking around in private data, we might start with what data private companies collect, how private company funding influences politics, and so on.
Seems dicey if peope are paying real money for them
If people limit themselves to an economy only operating on Bitcoins, that seems like an interesting monetary experiment. But for people to actually exchange real money for them, seems like Bitcoins might as well be Beanie Babies. Maybe the government should stay out of it and let it collapse on its own.
Re: Lack of uniforms actually would be an issue...
What would probably have to happen is similar to pizza delivery. You call and then expect to receive it within an hour. If someone tries to deliver something you haven't ordered, then you don't open the door.
But it's got to be small enough that the delivery person can leave it at the door. You don't want an unverified person bringing something inside your residence.
Yes, all things being equal, I can't see someone turning to Wal-Mart as their first choice. This system might work if ordering from Wal-Mart is cheaper than ordering from Amazon, but if it is the same price and at the same level of convenience, then people who already use Amazon are likely to stick with Amazon.
Now it could be argued that this is a great way to provide a financial benefit to Wal-Mart customers who get to do deliveries on the side. But Wal-Mart has not been known for the great salaries/benefits it gives its current employees, so I don't think giving in-store customers a little discount for delivering goods is going to overcome that image.
The article raises many of the issues Wal-Mart might face and cites what other delivery services have done.
I wonder if there would be a minimum purchase or a delivery charge. Where it might come in handy is if you are making dinner, are missing an ingredient, and don't want to run out for it.
According to the article, Wal-Mart would give in-store shoppers a financial incentive to do the delivery, but I wonder if the system would work for a $5 item, for example.
As big companies go, Google is better than many. But it is still a big, powerful company looking out for its best interests. And that isn't always in society's best interest. The tech community gives lip service to transparency, but they often mean as it applies to others, not themselves.
POWER-CURVE SOCIETY: The Future of Innovation, Opportunity and Social Equity in the Emerging Networked Economy | The Aspen Institute: "The industries that are most resistant to any change in the status quo, said [Michael Fertik, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Reputation.com], are Internet-based media incumbents such as Google and Facebook, which argue that new requirements to protect privacy will destroy innovation. Shane Green of Personal said that when he talks to people at large Internet companies that gather lots of personal data, he is 'amazed' at their resistance to disclosing how they capture data, what they do with it and how much money they make from it. 'They sound just like Ma Bell from way back,' said Fertik. 'They have absolutely no interest in talking about privacy. Why won’t [these companies] open up and talk about how they capture data and what they do with it? Because they’re controlling things in a way that benefit them and not everyone else.'”
Location Data Can Uniquely Identify Cellphone Users | Popular Science: "Just a few data points from a location-tracking cellphone are enough to identify most people, a new study found. ... The study fits in with growing evidence that fairly publicly available data—cellphone location data is open to many location-tracking apps, for example—is not as anonymous as you might think."
The money is your incentive to come up with the idea in the first place, and do the hard ego-stroking work of pitching it to CNBC and the target company; if you had to share it with free-riders why would you take on the responsibility?
This thinking sounds a lot like what industries have long argued. People won't do anything unless they can make money, and free-riders are bad. Sounds like the traditional content industries, doesn't it?
Quotes from Digital Disconnect: How Capitalism is Turning the Internet Against Democracy.
"As ‘killer applications’ have emerged, new digital industries have gone from competitive to oligopolistic to monopolistic at breakneck speeds.”
“It is true that with the advent of the Internet many of the successful giants -- Apple and Google come to mind -- were begun by idealists who may have been uncertain whether they really wanted to be old-fashioned capitalists. The system in short order has whipped them into shape. Any qualms about privacy, commercialism, avoiding taxes, or paying low wages to Third World factory workers were quickly forgotten. It is not that the managers are particularly bad and greedy people -- indeed their individual moral makeup is mostly irrelevant -- but rather that the system sharply rewards some types of behavior and penalizes other types of behavior so that people either get with the program and internalize the necessary values or they fail.”
My thought with all the big tech companies is do we need them anymore? What value do they bring to the table? What if transactions and ownership become so decentralized that no company or industry dominates?
What does Google need with a same-day shipping service anyway? | VentureBeat: "... we could even posit that the Google of the future could combine same-day shipping with self-driving delivery trucks. That sounds crazy, but this is Google we’re talking about. ... Google is stretching its tendrils into every market these days, and it’s become increasingly unsurprising."
I'll add that the primary reason copyright isn't a BIG issue for me is that the push to eliminate it still strikes me as something to make Google's life easier. I don't see a direct connection to global warming, pollution, economic inequality, the high cost of health care, etc.
It's important to me as a small part of a very big picture (creating a decentralized economic/political/power system) but not an issue where I'd be willing to put in time and money over other issues that matter to me more.
I'm far more interested in sustainability as a whole than in a narrow focus on pirate party issues.
I also tend not to vote for third parties because I worry that we'll get another Nader situation where votes are split and the candidate I don't want to win does.
However, I do believe my vote counts so I do vote and will volunteer to support some issues/candidates.
I think the most effective thing anyone can do is get involved at the local level. Not only can you have impact in your communities, you can elect politicians who will affect local, state, and national politics.
What I like about where I live is that there is a lot of cohesiveness to enact lots of sustainable policies and community-building programs. We can create programs that, if successful, can be models elsewhere.
People always seem to form some sort of group with rules and regulations. So when people complain about government, I figure they just don't like the form they are dealing with at the moment.
"It's possible that, in addition to wanting D'Aloisio's hustle and teenage, One Direction-y good looks for a marketing spokesperson position, Yahoo wanted to make all those big names in California happy."
"They include Acxiom, which aggregates data from a variety of sources, including financial services companies, court records and federal government documents; Datalogix, which claims to have a database on the spending habits of more than 100 million Americans in categories like fine jewelry, cough medicine and college tuition; and Epsilon, which also collects transaction data from retailers."
This just came out. Here's a company that tells you why government is evil, and then charges you for the privilege of bypassing that government service.
How the Maker of TurboTax Fought Free, Simple Tax Filing - ProPublica: "The disclosures show that Intuit as recently as 2011 lobbied on two bills, both of which died, that would have allowed many taxpayers to file pre-filled returns for free. The company also lobbied on bills in 2007 and 2011 that would have barred the Treasury Department, which includes the IRS, from initiating return-free filing."
Here. Look at this and imagine the possibilities. Imagine that the same data that predicts what people will buy can also predict what crimes they might commit. They won't be arrested unless they commit those crimes, but they can be more closely monitored to make sure that they don't.
Big data, non-stop monitoring, and predictions about consumer behavior are what companies are selling today. It's much more in-depth than what government agencies are doing.
It's already been suggested that the private prison lobby is behind certain anti-immigration laws in order to increase the number of people in prison. And we can see how the NRA influences gun laws. We also see how security companies benefit from airport screening.
What I am saying is that private companies are gathering considerable data on people already. And they are selling it to customers. The government could become a customer, too.
Pointing a finger at government agencies because they are government agencies overlooks all that is being done by private companies.
Imagine this scenario. The US government gets out of the spy and crime business. But it contracts it out. It goes to Facebook, Google, and others and says, "Develop some profiles to identify potential mass murderers, terrorists, cyberfraud folks, and so on, and we'll pay you based on your interception successes. We'll pay you very well if you make this a safer, more secure, more trustworthy country."
Governments already contract with private prison companies, security companies, and war-related companies. It's very much in the realm of possibility for everything to be privatized. The monitoring goes on, but instead of government workers, the people getting their hands dirty work for private companies. And if Google and Facebook don't want to do it directly, another company comes along, develops the profiles, and pays Google, Facebook, and others for access to specifically targeted audiences deemed a risk via big data.
On the post: US Government's Failure To Protect Public Privacy Is Driving Business Overseas
Re: Re: Maybe it's a good cover for tax avoidance
Well, yes. I'd prefer a total overhaul of the US tax system. And I advocate for lots of reform all across the government and economic system.
One reason I think we have to look at things differently now is that there are massive environmental impacts that we can't run away from. In the past, if people screwed up one area, they could move to another. Now that we are so interconnected, we've got to find solutions that require some level of cooperation or we need to find solutions that work even when people's poor decisions don't contribute to the common good.
On the post: US Government's Failure To Protect Public Privacy Is Driving Business Overseas
Maybe it's a good cover for tax avoidance
I think private companies totally pull the strings on what the government does with data. There are contracts to sell to government.
So if we don't want government poking around in private data, we might start with what data private companies collect, how private company funding influences politics, and so on.
Let's follow the money.
On the post: Feds Take A Step Closer To Trying To Regulate Bitcoin
Seems dicey if peope are paying real money for them
On the post: Wal-Mart Wants Store Customers To Deliver Packages To Online Shoppers
Re: Lack of uniforms actually would be an issue...
But it's got to be small enough that the delivery person can leave it at the door. You don't want an unverified person bringing something inside your residence.
On the post: Wal-Mart Wants Store Customers To Deliver Packages To Online Shoppers
Re: A Sample Order
Now it could be argued that this is a great way to provide a financial benefit to Wal-Mart customers who get to do deliveries on the side. But Wal-Mart has not been known for the great salaries/benefits it gives its current employees, so I don't think giving in-store customers a little discount for delivering goods is going to overcome that image.
On the post: Wal-Mart Wants Store Customers To Deliver Packages To Online Shoppers
Read the article
I wonder if there would be a minimum purchase or a delivery charge. Where it might come in handy is if you are making dinner, are missing an ingredient, and don't want to run out for it.
According to the article, Wal-Mart would give in-store shoppers a financial incentive to do the delivery, but I wonder if the system would work for a $5 item, for example.
On the post: Why Google's 'We Won't Sue' Patent Pledge May Actually Suggest A Greater Proclivity To Sue Over Patents
Re: Naive
POWER-CURVE SOCIETY: The Future of Innovation, Opportunity and Social Equity in the Emerging Networked Economy | The Aspen Institute: "The industries that are most resistant to any change in the status quo, said [Michael Fertik, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Reputation.com], are Internet-based media incumbents such as Google and Facebook, which argue that new requirements to protect privacy will destroy innovation. Shane Green of Personal said that when he talks to people at large Internet companies that gather lots of personal data, he is 'amazed' at their resistance to disclosing how they capture data, what they do with it and how much money they make from it. 'They sound just like Ma Bell from way back,' said Fertik. 'They have absolutely no interest in talking about privacy. Why won’t [these companies] open up and talk about how they capture data and what they do with it? Because they’re controlling things in a way that benefit them and not everyone else.'”
On the post: The List Of Government Agencies That Can Get Your Data Under CISPA
Re: Re: Re: 3rd parties = Google, Facebook, Twitter, Techdirt...
On the post: Now Canada Wants Activist Investors To Share With The Rest Of The Class
Monetary incentives? Free-riders?
This thinking sounds a lot like what industries have long argued. People won't do anything unless they can make money, and free-riders are bad. Sounds like the traditional content industries, doesn't it?
On the post: Why Google's 'We Won't Sue' Patent Pledge May Actually Suggest A Greater Proclivity To Sue Over Patents
Re: Do we still need big?
"As ‘killer applications’ have emerged, new digital industries have gone from competitive to oligopolistic to monopolistic at breakneck speeds.”
“It is true that with the advent of the Internet many of the successful giants -- Apple and Google come to mind -- were begun by idealists who may have been uncertain whether they really wanted to be old-fashioned capitalists. The system in short order has whipped them into shape. Any qualms about privacy, commercialism, avoiding taxes, or paying low wages to Third World factory workers were quickly forgotten. It is not that the managers are particularly bad and greedy people -- indeed their individual moral makeup is mostly irrelevant -- but rather that the system sharply rewards some types of behavior and penalizes other types of behavior so that people either get with the program and internalize the necessary values or they fail.”
More here: Digital Grab: Corporate Power Has Seized the Internet | Common Dreams
On the post: Why Google's 'We Won't Sue' Patent Pledge May Actually Suggest A Greater Proclivity To Sue Over Patents
Do we still need big?
What does Google need with a same-day shipping service anyway? | VentureBeat: "... we could even posit that the Google of the future could combine same-day shipping with self-driving delivery trucks. That sounds crazy, but this is Google we’re talking about. ... Google is stretching its tendrils into every market these days, and it’s become increasingly unsurprising."
On the post: Brazil's New Political Party: Green With A Shade Of Pirate
Re: Stay active
It's important to me as a small part of a very big picture (creating a decentralized economic/political/power system) but not an issue where I'd be willing to put in time and money over other issues that matter to me more.
On the post: Brazil's New Political Party: Green With A Shade Of Pirate
Stay active
I also tend not to vote for third parties because I worry that we'll get another Nader situation where votes are split and the candidate I don't want to win does.
However, I do believe my vote counts so I do vote and will volunteer to support some issues/candidates.
I think the most effective thing anyone can do is get involved at the local level. Not only can you have impact in your communities, you can elect politicians who will affect local, state, and national politics.
What I like about where I live is that there is a lot of cohesiveness to enact lots of sustainable policies and community-building programs. We can create programs that, if successful, can be models elsewhere.
I also recommend that people turn to the resources that are available including the P2P Foundation, On the Commons, Shareable, New Economics Institute, Institute for Local Self-Reliance, and so on.
On the post: Florida Homeowner's Association Sues Resident For Critical Blog Comments, Seeks Identity Of Other Commenters
Why we'll never get rid of government
Getting rid of all government is highly unlikely.
On the post: Still A Dumb Trend: Pop Star Endorsements Pretending To Be 'Creative Directors'
Is this really much different?
Guy Who 'Hates To Be A Curmudgeon' Explains Why Yahoo Buying A 17-Year-Old's Startup For $30 Million Makes No Sense - Business Insider: "D'Aloisio is a hustler. His investor list includes Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky, Zynga CEO Mark Pincus, Lady Gaga's manager Troy Carter, Automattic's Matt Mullenweg, Ashton Kutcher, Wendy Murdoch, and Yoko Ono.
"It's possible that, in addition to wanting D'Aloisio's hustle and teenage, One Direction-y good looks for a marketing spokesperson position, Yahoo wanted to make all those big names in California happy."
On the post: The List Of Government Agencies That Can Get Your Data Under CISPA
Re: Re: Re: 3rd parties = Google, Facebook, Twitter, Techdirt...
"They include Acxiom, which aggregates data from a variety of sources, including financial services companies, court records and federal government documents; Datalogix, which claims to have a database on the spending habits of more than 100 million Americans in categories like fine jewelry, cough medicine and college tuition; and Epsilon, which also collects transaction data from retailers."
On the post: The List Of Government Agencies That Can Get Your Data Under CISPA
Follow the money when big tech lobbies
How the Maker of TurboTax Fought Free, Simple Tax Filing - ProPublica: "The disclosures show that Intuit as recently as 2011 lobbied on two bills, both of which died, that would have allowed many taxpayers to file pre-filled returns for free. The company also lobbied on bills in 2007 and 2011 that would have barred the Treasury Department, which includes the IRS, from initiating return-free filing."
On the post: The List Of Government Agencies That Can Get Your Data Under CISPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 3rd parties = Google, Facebook, Twitter, Techdirt...
Big data, non-stop monitoring, and predictions about consumer behavior are what companies are selling today. It's much more in-depth than what government agencies are doing.
The Future of Consumer Profiling Is Here!
On the post: The List Of Government Agencies That Can Get Your Data Under CISPA
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 3rd parties = Google, Facebook, Twitter, Techdirt...
What I am saying is that private companies are gathering considerable data on people already. And they are selling it to customers. The government could become a customer, too.
Pointing a finger at government agencies because they are government agencies overlooks all that is being done by private companies.
On the post: The List Of Government Agencies That Can Get Your Data Under CISPA
Re: Re: Re: 3rd parties = Google, Facebook, Twitter, Techdirt...
Governments already contract with private prison companies, security companies, and war-related companies. It's very much in the realm of possibility for everything to be privatized. The monitoring goes on, but instead of government workers, the people getting their hands dirty work for private companies. And if Google and Facebook don't want to do it directly, another company comes along, develops the profiles, and pays Google, Facebook, and others for access to specifically targeted audiences deemed a risk via big data.
Next >>